Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Tower's Go?

Initiate
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:35 pm

PostSun Mar 13, 2011 8:53 pm » by Cee420


Was it Judy Wood who claimed

…that they used explosives in the WTC Buildings ...”as a decoy” to lead people away from the Direct Energy Weapons they supposedly used ..or was it Khalezov ..LOOOOL!! ..how fucking stupid of a suggestion that really is ..think about it

..“They used explosives to hide other weapons” ..pure genius!

It really is cunning tricks like this is what allow criminals to get away eventually ..LOL

..."i have a cunning plan"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldrick
Image

:D

Initiate
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 4:44 pm

PostSun Mar 13, 2011 8:57 pm » by Sketchsi


cee420 wrote:“90% of the Twin Towers turned to iron rich dust” …this simply isn’t true
Most of the concrete and similar material turned to dust and gravel because of the controlled demolition with high explosives and nano-thermite..
..but most of the structural steel was found in solid form ..it was not pulverized ..and you can easily verify this from photos and articles.
‘Iron rich micro spheres’ can be found in the WTC-dust and the source of this is the nano-thermite and the thermite-effect it produces
“Where did the Towers go?” ..the Twin towers did not leave a tall rubble pile because the material was ejected OUTWARDS and the rubble landed on a wide area ..and you can easily see this from the pictures.

Judy Woods “theories” are full of mistakes and some of the theories are quite silly even ..like the “melting of car engine blocks” ..this never happened

-
-
“In my professional opinion, this book..”
You’re a ”professional” in exactly what area that relates to the destruction of the WTC buildings?!
You’re an engineer who’ studying structural behavior during collapses or something?!

You’re such a professional that you “dropped out of the conversation” on your last “Judy Wood challenge thread”?
9-11-challenge-explain-the-evidence-t38676-50.html#p441243
Like a typical dis-info “agent” ..when you can’t explain your own mistakes when someone takes the time to provide reasonable explanations to most of the points of you “challenge” (me and others)..you disappear for few months and start a new thread with the same dis-info

-
-
I suggest that everyone who is seriously concearn about the 9/11 events and especially about the destruction of the WTC buildings
to watch this presentation by Richard Gage of ‘Architects & Engineers for 9//11 Truth’
9/11: Blueprint For Truth (part 1 of 13)


Upload to Disclose.tv


It’s FREE for everyone ..and demonstrates their claims with video evidence, not by silly assumptions and conclusions and still-photos used “out of context” ..like Judy Woods still photos of “WTC core turning to dust”, which never actually happened in reality

Check out the other scientific study videos from their YouTube channel on the structural behavior of the WTC buildings during their collapse
http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth
..some of the videos demonstrate the demolition ejection-waves from the demolition charges ..like this one here:

The North Tower exploding


Upload to Disclose.tv


This David Chandlers folder has many excellent video analyses of the controlled demolition of the WTC
http://www.youtube.com/user/DavidChandl ... 82383CCA91



:flop:

Don't fall for red herring dis-info agents like the "oh so polite pooktza" here


NOTICE how the debris is flying upwards?

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2788
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:39 pm
Location: Oceanic 815

PostSun Mar 13, 2011 9:04 pm » by Epicfailure


cee420 wrote:Was it Judy Wood who claimed

…that they used explosives in the WTC Buildings ...”as a decoy” to lead people away from the Direct Energy Weapons they supposedly used ..or was it Khalezov ..LOOOOL!! ..how fucking stupid of a suggestion that really is ..think about it

..“They used explosives to hide other weapons” ..pure genius!

It really is cunning tricks like this is what allow criminals to get away eventually ..LOL

..."i have a cunning plan"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldrick
Image

:D


It's a double Conspiracy wrapped in bacon!

everyone knows that. :roll:

:lol:

:badair: on the suggestion of this thread
Image

Initiate
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:35 pm

PostSun Mar 13, 2011 9:15 pm » by Cee420


sketchsi wrote:NOTICE how the debris is flying upwards?


Well ..it might have a little angle upwards at places ..or is that an optical illusin caused by the camera angle relative to the cloud shooting on the side of the building and coming into the light? ..cunno ..at least there is not a huge upwards angle

..but it's mostly shooting out directly to the side
..but the debris really is ‘shooting out’ ..in some videos you can see some debris going much faster than freefalling objects next to them ..and the skylobby floors (at 70-something floors and at 40-something floors)shot out with huge force ..the 40-something skylobby pieces flew furthest away from the building ..even longer than the pieces that came from much higher ..which is against the laws of physics if it all really happened with out explosives.
:flop:

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:03 pm

PostMon Mar 14, 2011 2:22 pm » by Rydher


So 767's with full fuel payloads slamming into the towers at full speed had nothing to do with the towers coming down? I'm sure they anticipated that when they made them.

Initiate
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:35 pm

PostMon Mar 14, 2011 5:16 pm » by Cee420


rydher wrote:So 767's with full fuel payloads slamming into the towers at full speed had nothing to do with the towers coming down? I'm sure they anticipated that when they made them.


Hey..

Actually the Twin Towers were built to survive a hit Boeing 707 of DC-8 and the fires this would cause.
These plane types weren’t that much smaller than the 767 that hit the Towers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_o ... ft_impacts

..and the Collapsing towers are full of individual and waves of pressure ejections from explosives and you can go see this for yourself
..one of these videos I already posted earlier to this thread
Here are couple of vids in which you see a cutting charge cutting a corner column ..the second and third vids show light flashes from these cutter charges:
Cutter Charges in the North Tower of the World Trade Center


Upload to Disclose.tv




911 : WTC2 - Flashes of light in WTC2 South Tower.


Upload to Disclose.tv




911- WTC2 flashes part 2.


Upload to Disclose.tv





-
-
But how about WTC building 7 ..no planes ever hit that building, and even NIST, who investigated the collapse of WTC 7 said that the structural damage it got from debris from the Twin Towers id not play a part in it’s collapse ..it was due to fire, heat expansion and structural failures ..they claim.
But they can’t explain why the collapsing WTC 7 accelerates speed that is “equivalent to the acceleration of gravity” ..even according to NIST

“Free Falling” objects has no support below, and for a building to experience FREE FALL, all of the structures (resistance) must have been removed from below, simultaneously, so that the part above can “fall freely” ...


From NIST’s report:
“..The slope of the velocity curve is approximately constant between about 1.75 s and 4.0 s, and a good straight line fit to the points in this range (open-circles in Figure 3-15) allowed estimation of a constant downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was 32.2 ft/s2 (9 .81 m/s2 ), equivalent to the acceleration of gravity g.”
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf

So.. NIST admits that WTC 7 experienced a FREE FALL during it’s collapse!

“Free fall time would be a an object which has no structural components below it”
...as stated by NIST’s Dr. Shyam Sundar starting 3:20 on the Part I of the 3-part presentation linked below.
..and for a building this requires a ‘controlled demolition’!

WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA
WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k
WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw


peace.

Initiate
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:35 pm

PostFri Jun 03, 2011 9:39 am » by Cee420


pookzta wrote:Dr. Judy Wood’s book is finally out!

Check it out here: http://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com

This book is of vast importance - the most detailed and illustrative study of what happened to the WTC buildings - and a look at the nature and some of the possible history behind the technology which was used to turn more than 90% of those buildings to microspheric iron-rich dust.



% of iron in WTC dust proves Judy Wood’s claims wrong

Here’s a post I wrote to a “nukes detonated under WTC buildings”-thread
..but the same reply and facts of the matter also show Judy Woods’ DEW-theory and her research wrong.


Like Khalezov’s nuke theory, Judy Wood’s DEW-theory both claim that a large/most part of the Twin Towers steel got pulverized to micro-sized spheres


But when we look att the facts of the matter they show that WTC-steel columns DID NOT turn to dust

.. the WTC dust samples, tested by USGS and others, show iron content of between less than 1% to 5 %
..can you please tell me where is the supposed “pulverized steel” which is a foundation of Wood’s theory?

Apparently, the mass of the Twin Towers were little under 40 % Steel and around the same % of concrete ..so if most part of the Tower(s) got pulverized, the iron/steel content of the dust should be around the same 40 %, but it is not even close to that ..only around 5 % max, and some samples showed less than 1% of iron


Here’s a USGS WTC dust elements table ..from which you can verify my claim about the iron %:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-042 ... table.html


..and here’s one article covering the iron-spheres in the WTC dust mentioning other WTC dust study findings on the iron-rich micro spheres:

http://911caper.com/2010/12/25/billions ... materials/
“The fraction of microspheres in the dust varied (between 0.2 and 1.3 % for USGS outdoor samples and a mean of 5.87% for all RJ Lee samples) depending on the area where the samples were taken. Due to their shape and density, the spheres were not likely to have traveled as far as other components of the dust. The diameter of the spheres in two evaluated dust samples ranged from about one micron (0.001 mm) to 1.5 mm.”



In reality this pulverization never happened ..just about the same amount of steel column was taken away from the site as was brought in when they were building the Towers
..they shipped most of the steel to China and India, who then re-used it


..and you can see Twin Tower core columns all over the WTC site after the events. ..the core columns are the individual columns in the pic, and the perimeter columns are as wall-elements , with several columns attached together

Image



..can you explain this, Abe? ..where is the pulverized steel which is the ‘foundation’ of Judy Wood’s theory?

But you’re probably not going to ..cause you’re seemingly not that keen to talk about the mistakes in Judy Wood’s research and claims

So, there goes, down the drain, the ‘theory’ you’re promoting ..shown to be false.


The iron spheres came from nano-thermite cutting charges ..iron rich micro-spheres are a by-product of thermite-reaction.


Peace.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:03 pm

PostFri Jun 03, 2011 12:52 pm » by Rydher


The iron spheres came from nano-thermite cutting charges ..iron rich micro-spheres are a by-product of thermite-reaction.


Image

Initiate
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:36 pm

PostFri Jun 03, 2011 1:08 pm » by Mandown


pookzta wrote:Dr. Judy Wood’s book is finally out!

Check it out here: http://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com

This book is of vast importance - the most detailed and illustrative study of what happened to the WTC buildings - and a look at the nature and some of the possible history behind the technology which was used to turn more than 90% of those buildings to microspheric iron-rich dust.

See what people are saying about the book here: http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/comments

Here is a promotional trailer, which you can share with others if you wish:


Upload to Disclose.tv



In my professional opinion, this book is literally the single most evidence-packed piece of literature regarding 9/11 to be published since it happened. It is neither based on theory nor speculation; rather, it is simply based on easily-verifiable well-referenced physical evidence, analysis and discussion of that evidence, and the inescapable conclusions that are drawn from that evidence. This book is a must-read for any person who wishes to understand the true implications of the 9/11 attacks, and why there has been such an obvious, extensive, and relentless attempt to confuse people and divert our attention away from this overwhelming sum of important evidence. The truth has been out for a long time thanks to the selfless efforts of Dr. Judy Wood and the online database she has compiled at drjudywood.com, and now it has taken a new form.

The book is a 500-page, hardcover, full-color textbook, and the quality rivals even the most professional scientific text books I have bought for school.

Please support the book in some way, shape or form - even if only by forwarding or re-posting this message.


Thanks for reading this if you did!


Best wishes,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

it costs 25£
ManDown

Initiate
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 12:35 pm

PostFri Jun 03, 2011 3:02 pm » by Cee420


rydher wrote:
The iron spheres came from nano-thermite cutting charges ..iron rich micro-spheres are a by-product of thermite-reaction.


Image



LOL

..coming from a "thermite expert" who thinks or claims Barium is need for thermites
..and because he claims there was no barium present in the WTC dust/remains ..this then, according to Rydher, proves no thermite-charges were used in the WTC-event

But
A) Barium is only an additive to the thermite composite
B) they actually list elemental form of barium in the WTC dust
C) even the "WTC dust nano-thermite find"-study by Niels Harrit and Steven Jones et al. lists barium being present in the nano-thermite chips
..but not on every chip ..which tells us there were different thermite mixtures used



You really haven't even read the study have you, genius?
..you really heaven't read into this matter that much ..or how is it?



:flop:


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook